“More than 230 filmmakers signed a letter denouncing the documentary. A majority had not seen it.”
Just a reminder that the far ends of the political spectrum loop back and connect.
Just a reminder that the far ends of the political spectrum loop back and connect.
It's interesting how easy it was to ignore and ridicule those movements at the time, we'd go "ah, those silly fundies", how quaint. Remember Kevin Smith picketing with them outside of movie theaters at the Dogma premiere? We got a good chuckle out of it.
Yet look at how seriously the same people are taking the current flavor of moral panic.
It is depressing how blind the left (my side!) are to it, you still see them denying it or - now that the mainstream has become aware of it and they are on the defensive - excusing it with nonsense about "accountability/call-out/consequence culture".
Shameful.
The PMRC was an absolutely bipartisan effort. Tipper Gore was a founding member, and probably the most prominent person amongst their leadership. Probably a good idea to try and project your biases onto history a little less.
Edit: actually ignore me. I don't think we have matching definitions of left and right wing. And I definitely don't have knowledge of whether the US Democrats are left wing by any definition I'd use
In the 80s and 90s, about 90% of US adults identified as Christian. So your question here doesn’t really make sense.
> I don't think we have matching definitions of left and right wing
I’m getting the impression that your idea of “right wing” is just all the things that you don’t like, such as Christianity. Irrespective of actual the histories of right and left wing politics…
As for Christianity, I hope we can agree that the teachings of Jesus are quite to the left on the political spectrum.
On the other hand, these claims turned out to be excellent marketing for those records.
I wouldn't be completely shocked if some of the initial outrage about Jihad Rehab was triggered by a shrewd marketer, similarly how marketers would tip off the Tucker Max movie screenings to feminist organizations around campuses in the hopes that they would call for a cancellation.
Doubt we'll ever see the evidence for that though.
So yes.
So not even a little.
If you support terror groups - and I mean in the strictest sense, as in people that attack civilians - you're on the far edge of politics. Before you shout that Corbyn was 'reaching out' to terrorists by saying they're his friends, that punishing people that killed innocent people in Brighton was a show trial, or laying wreaths at their funerals: everyone involved in Northern Ireland or the Middle East peace processes claims that Corbyn, a Labour back bencher at the time, had nothing to do with either of the Northern Ireland or the Middle East peace process.
> People that liked Corbyn joined Labour
Because of a Momentum campaign that cynically exploited a brief moment allowing anyone to join the Labour party for 5 pounds.
> antisemitism accusations were used cynically by the right of Labour for years
And obviously the far left is still denying them even after the party's own investigation found they had substance.
Pardon? What specifically of the very specific, widely accepted points of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33215270 was not based in fact?
If you think my points are issues with the mainstream left rather than the far left I don’t think you’ve been reading the posts you keep writing replies to.
[1] https://www.britannica.com/biography/Adolf-Hitler/Rise-to-po...
"Terrorist rehab" would be quite an ill-suited name. There is no indication that the men in the documentary ever were terrorists, aside from one of them.
You could have suggested "Guantanamo rehab". That would have better qualified the men in the film than "terrorists". Even then I think it's unfair to call racist her decision to name the film after that Saudi program.